On average, more than three cases are reported every day of the year to the Norwegian Bureau for the Investigation of Police Affairs (Spesialenheten for politisaker). No one has been prosecuted in 109 cases so far this year. Sixty-seven per cent of the cases are dismissed.

A total of 1305 cases concerning police violence, corruption, dereliction of duty and other matters were processed last year. Only in 3 per cent of the cases was a penal sanction imposed. Theft, snooping in registers, disclosure of confidential documents to journalists, accidental discharge of firearms and sexual relations with police students for whom one serves as supervisor result in fines or waiver of prosecution. No one has so far lost their job.

In a dismissed case that will not be investigated, Vest politidistrikt (Western Police District) receives criticism because evidentiary material in a sexual assault case was lost. The police did not secure trace samples and similar evidence before the sexual assault reception centre destroyed it after six months.

– This was blameworthy, but nevertheless not so serious that it falls under the penal provisions concerning official misconduct, the Bureau believes.

Sixty-seven per cent of the cases were dismissed without further investigation, according to last year’s annual report.

Of the 430 cases that were not dismissed, eight per cent (34 cases) ended with reactions such as fines, charges or waiver of prosecution where, according to the body, it was not appropriate to prosecute the perpetrator.

The Bureau consistently refers to all parties as «hen» (a gender-neutral pronoun), and it is therefore impossible to use words such as policeman or policewoman when Document refers to the cases.

Everyone is «hen» at the Bureau. (Facsimile: Annual Report 2025)

Twenty-seven per cent of the cases with prosecutorial decisions were appealed further to the Director of Public Prosecutions (Riksadvokaten), who altered the decision in only 8 of 248 cases. Four cases were returned with a demand for further investigation.

Asbjørn Skåland, former sheriff (lensmann) and enforcement officer (namsmann) in Flekkefjord. (Photo: Private)

The former sheriff (lensmann) in Flekkefjord, Asbjørn Skåland, who also served as enforcement officer (namsmann), has admitted abuse of public office when he himself purchased an Audi A6 that was to be sold through compulsory sale. He registered the sale in the name of his father-in-law. The Bureau brought charges against him last year. The confession case was in court and concluded on Thursday this week.

Two other cases against him were dismissed by the Bureau last year after almost two years of investigation. Skåland is now retired.

The Bureau believes Skåland should have received an unconditional prison sentence, but almost ten years have passed since the offence occurred. It has therefore requested a suspended sentence and a fine.

Relationship with police student

Another police employee in Agder failed to write the whole truth in a report in a criminal case. A police officer was threatened during an assignment, but the colleague who wrote the report failed to state that it was the police officer himself who had provoked the threats. The case was settled with waiver of prosecution.

A fine of NOK 10,000 was imposed on the police officer who failed to enter the names of two suspects in a seizure report concerning a narcotics find. The location of the discovery was also entered incorrectly.

What we with some probability may assume was a policeman was fined for initiating a sexual relationship with a female police student for whom he served as supervisor. The question of possible abuse of a position of power under the Penal Code was dismissed.

Illegal searches

Eight fines of between NOK 3,000 and 15,000 were imposed on police employees who snooped in various internal police registers. One searched for an 18-year-old woman with whom he/she had contact through social media. Another searched for a deceased person in the family of his/her cohabiting partner.

Stole watch at airport

• Two police officers in Agder used a military flashbang explosive during training that injured a police employee without hearing protection, and were fined for this.
• A person in Vest politidistrikt received a fine for having given confidential criminal case documents to a journalist, who used them in a documentary film.
• A police officer stole an Apple watch that was charging at the gate at Tromsø airport.
• A monetary seizure that a sheriff’s office delivered to Sentrum police station in Trondheim was placed in an unlocked office and was stolen, but the police district never discovered who had done it.
• An investigator had an audio recorder with several interrogations stolen from his private car, where it had been left overnight. “The matter did not reach the high threshold for official misconduct”, the Bureau believes.
• An anonymous tip reported a very favourable discount arrangement offered by a parking garage in Grønland in Oslo to employees of Oslo politidistrikt. But the discount was not improper and was not intended to influence, according to the Bureau. The case was dismissed.

Ignored the rules

Agder politidistrikt was last year given a substantial fine for failing to facilitate confidential telephone conversations between lawyers and detainees. Custodial officers were consistently present with the detainee “to keep watch”.

“The police district has for many years been aware of the practice and that it is contrary to the regulations. The practice has nevertheless been maintained, even though improvements and compliance with the regulations […] could have been achieved with simple means […]”, writes the Bureau.

In Troms, memory sticks seized by the police were used to store confidential police documents and were then returned to the owner, so that the information went astray. No one knows who did it. The Norwegian Data Protection Authority (Datatilsynet) has been notified. Allegedly there is a lack of evidence, and the case was dismissed.

Police car on the run

Earlier this year a policeman received a fine after forgetting to put the police car in parking mode when he was about to arrest a fugitive. The patrol vehicle therefore also ran off down the road, with a person in the passenger seat, and struck another police officer, who among other things sustained concussion. The driver received a fine for violation of the Road Traffic Act (veitrafikkloven).

The proportion of reported cases to the Bureau that are dismissed without investigation is increasing, according to the annual report for 2025. While only 33 per cent of the cases were investigated in 2025, almost twice as large a proportion was investigated in 2008 (61%).

Shot into the ceiling at the police station

Two police officers have been investigated for accidental discharge indoors so far this year. Neither checked the chamber before beginning to dismantle the weapon, and on both occasions others were present.

During the whole of last year the number of investigated accidental discharges was five. There appear to be at least 21 reports of accidental discharge in the Bureau’s system.

A police employee in Sør-Øst escaped with waiver of prosecution for firing a semi-automatic shotgun into the ceiling inside the police station without checking whether the weapon was loaded.

An unsecured rifle discharged in a residential area, but the Bureau believes the safety may have slipped off while the police officer carried the rifle slung over his shoulder. The case was therefore dismissed.

Many unreasonable complaints

Many cases that are reported appear obviously unreasonable. Such as the electric scooter rider suspected of attempted murder with a shotgun, who afterwards complained about the police because he was injured when he tried to avoid a police barricade. Dismissed as no criminal offence.

It was also dismissed when a man who struck a police officer in the face and was heavily intoxicated reported the police for arresting him.

Three persons who have been shot by the police have had their cases processed so far this year. After respectively stabbing a person, threatening ambulance personnel with several knives and advancing towards the police with a knife, they filed complaints that they had been shot – despite prior warnings.

During the whole of 2025 the Bureau registered five police shootings (instances where police fired shots).

Police prosecutor delayed complaint case

In some cases the Bureau admits that the police have committed wrongdoing, but the cases are not assessed as sufficiently serious for there to be consequences for the police officers.

One person, for example, reported a police prosecutor for having breached his official duties by dismissing a report concerning threats. The complaint against the dismissal lay for five months before it was forwarded to the Public Prosecutor (Statsadvokaten) for consideration.

The same police prosecutor failed to process the same person’s request for renewal of a restraining order. This case lay unprocessed for approximately six months.

Even though the Bureau concludes that the lack of follow-up constituted a breach of duty, it was not considered to “reach the statutory threshold for what is regarded as serious breaches of duty”. Case dismissed.